The equilibrium constraint

The sensations are divided into two well-known groups: on one side the group of sensations that relate to « well-being », at different intensities, for example: laughter, smile, plenitude, simple good humor, contemplation, up to physical pleasure. On the other side, the group of the « unease »: sadness, suffering, bad mood or simple melancholy, crying, up to anguish for example.

There are no names that specifically refer to these two « groups », and I’ll use the general state designation « felling good », « well-being » or « joys » and « felling bad », « sorrow » or « sadness ». The vocabulary is not perfect in that domain, but everyone understands what is it about, a group relating to the « pleasant » sensations and the other to the « unpleasant » sensations.

It has always been assumed to be true (without any proof), that it is possible to feel only the sensations of the « pleasant » group (and therefore to feel no sensations of the « unpleasant » group) if the requirements are fulfilled, in love, family, friends, Work, wealth, etc.. But yet it seems that nobody reaches this point…

Worse, everyone feels the sensations of the « unpleasant » group in a chronic way, and often in important and strange proportions with regard to the living conditions « on paper » of the people concerned … Even the rich, beautiful, famous people and/or powerful, seems to suffer, and even more than us sometimes ! Just take a look at the press people to see the disaster…

So we are obviously missing something, we are making a mistake somewhere, and it is necessarily on the belief that it is possible to feel only sensations of the « nice » group (or only some of the « bad » one).

We all feels well that we would be much closer to the reality if we start from the principle that we can not feel the sensations of a single group, « pleasant » or « unpleasant », permanently, and that after a moment of feeling the sensations of one of these groups we reach a sort of « maximum » in the concerned group. What we may not know is that the only way to restore the ability of feeling again the sensations of that group which have reached its « maximum » is to feel the sensation of the opposite group.

A fairly good analogy of this would be to consider ourselves attached to an elastic band: by going up we feel a form of « well being » and descending a form of « sadness ». The intensity of the sensations felt depends on the speed at which we go in one direction or the other. But when one moves away from the center (where the elastic is attached) it stretches and draws us more and more downwards, and we therefore increasingly tend to descend « easily » what is translated by a greater « sensitivity to sadness », in this state the slightest « bad news » immediately triggers important « bad feeling » immediately … In the other direction if one descends below the « center », where the elastic is attached, it begins to tighten also and we are increasingly inclined to climb « easily », which translates into a greater sensitivity to « joys », in this state any little « good » New « also affects us in an important way, makes us instantly very joyful for example.

We can therefore summarize that by the existence of a particular link between the two groups of sensations: our mind, our consciousness, has a « constraint of functioning » more or less « hidden », and one can not Feel the pleasurable group feelings only to the same extent as those of the unpleasant group, and vice versa.

If an imbalance begins to appear in favor of one of the groups, if one senses too much the sensations of one of the two groups, then there is a kind of « sensitivity » to the other group that develops more and more, then the slightest event related to this group will instantly trigger the « missing sensation ». As if « the elastic » had stretched and tried to return to its point of balance.

Finally, if the imbalance becomes very important, for example if everything is perfect and nothing happens negative in our life, in extreme cases of imbalance so, the mind will become so « lacking » and « sensitive » that it will goes up to « invent » something, totally imaginary, to feel the sensation of the missing group. These are the phenomena of anguish for example for extreme tension toward « sadness » or hysteria for extreme tension toward « joy ».

It seems shocking at first because there is such a « culture of happiness », always smiling, always in good humor, that pain, ill-being, suffering are almost « taboo », then present them as Things « normal », and even « anticipate » them in the same « volume » as the group of pleasant sensations, is very .. against the current one will say …

Obviously the duration AND intensity of the sensations are very important. Both must be taken into account and thus there will be, for example, an equality between « a slight and long » and « a strong and short joy ». Or else the equality between « a sharp and short sentence » and « a light and long joy ». Countless combinations following each other, provoked by life, chance, luck, bad luck, adding up, subtracting, at all intensities, of all duration, but with this constraint, a kind of « tension » which pushes us to return « towards the balance » when there is too much of one of the two .

Why this « constraint »? I don’t know .. Whether it is chemical, or structural, but probably because of the intimate mechanism of functioning of the widely unknown consciousness …

I agree that it’s not very « sexy » as an « idea », and maybe that’s why it’s usually pretty badly accepted by people who hear it for the first time … Always this little dream that drags somewhere to be « happy forever » .. one day .. like at the end of the fairy tales… But no, this not how it work… As one would have suspected.